What's new

Will Joe Root beat Sachin Tendulkar's record in Tests for most runs?

Yousuf was insane that year, though he did get much easier competition than 2021 Root.

I don't what's definition of easier competition is.... but here is the comparison between the two...from opposing bowlers standpoint.

As a side note....
Root played 6 tests at home (4 vs India and 2 vs NZ).... and averaged 24.25 vs NZ. 661 runs at home in 6 test.
Yousuf played 4 tests in England and averaged 90.14 in seaming conditions. 631 runs vs England in England in 4 test.



1733768044630.png


Here are the bowlers they both faced during their respective record years.

1733769748730.png

1733769776338.png
 
Number of 100s by Root, Smith, Kohli and Williamson.... until 2020, since 2020 and over all...

Root in last 4 years is miles ahead of other three ....


.
1733853279435.png

....


1733853299434.png



.....

1733853328041.png
 
It is simple—even if Root scores the most, who is he really going to replace in the all-time great Test team?

In the ATG Test batters lists people have shared in this thread, if Kallis can’t get in, then Joe Root isn’t making it either.

The guy will have to score centuries in Australia and deliver some important match-winning knocks.

Total runs are a great achievement in cricket, but they’re not the greatest achievement. They give more credence to longevity than to relative performance.
 
So the battle continues....

JdWBJ2W.jpg
 
It is simple—even if Root scores the most, who is he really going to replace in the all-time great Test team?

In the ATG Test batters lists people have shared in this thread, if Kallis can’t get in, then Joe Root isn’t making it either.

The guy will have to score centuries in Australia and deliver some important match-winning knocks.

Total runs are a great achievement in cricket, but they’re not the greatest achievement. They give more credence to longevity than to relative performance.

Root would not find a place in all time great Test batters in the top 15.
 
Legendary career so far root is having. He should break Sachin's record but his form has declined
 
Joe Root gets out at 54 runs in the second innings vs New Zealand and currently has 12968 runs.
 
Root should get there, plenty of tests and enough time for him to do it.
 
Joe Root 12 years after his debut has played 152 tests
Sachin Tendulkar 12 yeasr after his debut played 89 tests

That is a staggering number of difference. 63 tests. It is like Joe Root having two Test careers in the same period.
 
As per Michael Vaughan root will beat the record in the ashes 2027 when Australia tour eng.
 
Wonderful batsman but let’s not use him as some kind of protoganist vs Tendulkar.
 
Root can't Even played a straight ball against spinners .lol

:kp

One bad game can happen.

Tendulkar also struggled against Kenya once. It doesn't mean Tendulkar doesn't know how to defend a ball. Bad game can happen to anyone.

 
One bad game can happen.

Tendulkar also struggled against Kenya once. It doesn't mean Tendulkar doesn't know how to defend a ball. Bad game can happen to anyone.

Root averages 21 with no tons since 2020 , strike rate 81 .( ODI)

:kp
 
More centuries in wins than any Pakistani batsman. Amazing!
From a guy who has 51 test centuries, the fact that 31 of them have been lost causes or draws isn't a good sign.

Compare that to Steve smith, Assuming he scores another century today and aus wins this test, that's 24 wins out of 36.

Steve smith is clearly better then Sachin in every metric except for runs and centuries cause that's no of matches dependent.

But anyway am not here to fight or talk about Pakistani test batters, just wish to highlight why I love Steve smith so much
 
LOL, Michael Slater has 11 of his 14 centuries in wins, while Brian Lara has just 8 of his 34 centuries in wins.
Lara is overrated in test cricket. He's good, but I never understood the hype?

He was bang avg in india and NZ, he's lucky he only played 3 games in India otherwise he'd have been exposed brutally and people wouldn't remember his as fondly.

And he's mostly a 45 avg batter in sena conditons.

He's not a htb but he's definitely a home boy and some of his test innings were downright selfish. It's his one wicket win vs Pakistan that gets remembered but he isn't all that special.

Lara is in the class of Waugh as a test batter.

Pointing, Sachin, Steve smith, kallis are better batsmen then he is and frankly speaking so is YK and Dravid.

Lara isn't all that special. He's a good test batter with memorable nostalgic moments of 2003 and some gun innings in test cricket. Sobers and viv were better test batters then he was as well.
 
From a guy who has 51 test centuries, the fact that 31 of them have been lost causes or draws isn't a good sign.

Compare that to Steve smith, Assuming he scores another century today and aus wins this test, that's 24 wins out of 36.

Steve smith is clearly better then Sachin in every metric except for runs and centuries cause that's no of matches dependent.

But anyway am not here to fight or talk about Pakistani test batters, just wish to highlight why I love Steve smith so much
I rate Smith very high too but the wins depend on your bowling attack too.

Kohli has 14 out of 30 centuries in wins, that’s more than Lara but he isn’t even a patch on Lara in test cricket.

Ricky Ponting who was rated lesser than Lata, Sachin has 30 centuries in wins coz of his team.
 
Lara is overrated in test cricket. He's good, but I never understood the hype?

He was bang avg in india and NZ, he's lucky he only played 3 games in India otherwise he'd have been exposed brutally and people wouldn't remember his as fondly.

And he's mostly a 45 avg batter in sena conditons.

He's not a htb but he's definitely a home boy and some of his test innings were downright selfish. It's his one wicket win vs Pakistan that gets remembered but he isn't all that special.

Lara is in the class of Waugh as a test batter.

Pointing, Sachin, Steve smith, kallis are better batsmen then he is and frankly speaking so is YK and Dravid.

Lara isn't all that special. He's a good test batter with memorable nostalgic moments of 2003 and some gun innings in test cricket. Sobers and viv were better test batters then he was as well.
Sobers was better, Viv is debatable but Lara was better than all others you named apart from Smith and Sachin.

Ricky Ponting averaged 43 in the 90s and was only able to take his average up in the noughties where flat pitches became common and bowling attacks started fading away. Lara and Sachin are clear of Ponting.

Jaques Kallis is even below Ponting, he also struggled in the 90s.
 
Sobers was better, Viv is debatable but Lara was better than all others you named apart from Smith and Sachin.

Ricky Ponting averaged 43 in the 90s and was only able to take his average up in the noughties where flat pitches became common and bowling attacks started fading away. Lara and Sachin are clear of Ponting.

Jaques Kallis is even below Ponting, he also struggled in the 90s.
Agree to disagree. Lara is a goat, so is waugh, i wasn't insulting him or anything. But I do believe he's a tad bit overrated.

If pointing wasn't a certified circus clown in India he'd be in Sachin and Smith's tier. It's just clown record in India has essentially put him in Root's class as a test batsmen.

But I don't want to consider that. Everywhere else he's been in the class of smith.
 
Agree to disagree. Lara is a goat, so is waugh, i wasn't insulting him or anything. But I do believe he's a tad bit overrated.

If pointing wasn't a certified circus clown in India he'd be in Sachin and Smith's tier. It's just clown record in India has essentially put him in Root's class as a test batsmen.

But I don't want to consider that. Everywhere else he's been in the class of smith.
Actually Never mind @jeeteshssaxena I change my mind, Lara > Pointing, YK and Kallis.
 
Aren't Waugh, Ponting and Sachin from the same era. Although by no means I am belittling his greatness. But just a valid question
They are, what I’m saying is that it’s the bowlers that take 20 wickets to win you a game and Australia’s bowling was the best among all teams in that era - there is literally no comparison with any team other than Pakistan but their batsmen were hopelessly found wanting in SENA conditions. You can find plethora of great hundreds not just by Tendulkar but several other greats of the game that did not result in their team winning because their bowling wasn’t as good. All great batters in that list regardless.
 
England showing full desperation to break the record. Playing test matches against Zimbabwe now at home 🤣

Well if you’re gonna break it that way, it will be meaningless
 
England showing full desperation to break the record. Playing test matches against Zimbabwe now at home 🤣

Well if you’re gonna break it that way, it will be meaningless
Sachin played 9 test vs Zimbabwe, so i guess those runs dont count. Why cant we as a fan of cricket appreciate when Root might do....there is a chance he might not even break it. I sense fans are getting nervous.
 
Sachin played 9 test vs Zimbabwe, so i guess those runs dont count. Why cant we as a fan of cricket appreciate when Root might do....there is a chance he might not even break it. I sense fans are getting nervous.
Well at least Sachin will remain the first ever to score most runs in Test Cricket.
 
Sachin played 9 test vs Zimbabwe, so i guess those runs dont count. Why cant we as a fan of cricket appreciate when Root might do....there is a chance he might not even break it. I sense fans are getting nervous.
Sachin played a much stronger Zimbabwe team. A team which won a Test series in Pakistan in the 98/99 and a team which would have given any team from this era a run for their money. Zimbabwe beat Pakistan which had Anwar, Inzamam, Wasim, Waqar, Mushtaq, Mohammad Yousuf, Sohail & Ijaz, that's how good they were in the 90's. So runs against them cannot be discredited. Heath Streak then was much better bowler than anyone from current Pakistan Test team. Murray Goodwin, Andy Flower, Neil Johnson were much better test batters than anyone playing for Pakistan at the moment.

Sachin Last test against Zimbabwe was in 2002 after which the latter disintegrated post 2003 WC due to politics in their country. Sachin did not participate in any games after that in Tests against Zimbabwe. India did tour Zimbabwe in 2004/05 and Sachin wasn't part of that team.

I have no issues with Root breaking Sachin's record. All records are meant to be broken and Root is a brilliant player. He has his flaws but has done amazingly well to get to 13K Test runs. He still has a long way to go, almost 3K runs but again good luck to him. Anyone scoring 16K test runs should be great as it is not easy to do so and that too with an average of 50+. You need to play lots of years and lots of games to achieve that target, so Root would deserve all the plaudits he gets if he gets there.
 
From a guy who has 51 test centuries, the fact that 31 of them have been lost causes or draws isn't a good sign.

Compare that to Steve smith, Assuming he scores another century today and aus wins this test, that's 24 wins out of 36.

Steve smith is clearly better then Sachin in every metric except for runs and centuries cause that's no of matches dependent.

But anyway am not here to fight or talk about Pakistani test batters, just wish to highlight why I love Steve smith so much
Why do we associate runs in winning causes as a negative towards the batter? Would you consider Brian Lara a bad and selfish batter because 26 out of his 34 hundreds have come either in draws or losing cause? It is the teams that they played in. It is foolish to compare Ponting, Waugh, Root and even Inzamam for that matter with Sachin. All of the players I mentioned had great bowling attack to support their runs. Most of Sachin's hundreds went in vain because of inept bowling resources India had during most of his career. It is like blaming Andy flower for not scoring a lot in winning causes even though he averages 50+ in Tests. Need to understand that a batter can score how many ever runs they want in Tests but unless the team has a good bowling attack, they will not win many games.
 
Fastest to 13,000 Test runs -


Sachin Tendulkar - 266 innings

Jacques Kallis - 269 innings

Ricky Ponting - 275 innings

Rahul Dravid - 277 innings

Joe Root - 279 innings​
 
Why do we associate runs in winning causes as a negative towards the batter? Would you consider Brian Lara a bad and selfish batter because 26 out of his 34 hundreds have come either in draws or losing cause? It is the teams that they played in. It is foolish to compare Ponting, Waugh, Root and even Inzamam for that matter with Sachin. All of the players I mentioned had great bowling attack to support their runs. Most of Sachin's hundreds went in vain because of inept bowling resources India had during most of his career. It is like blaming Andy flower for not scoring a lot in winning causes even though he averages 50+ in Tests. Need to understand that a batter can score how many ever runs they want in Tests but unless the team has a good bowling attack, they will not win many games.
Sachin had a world class batting unit to support him. Smith doesn't.

Anyway I dont hate Sachin, I view him as the 4th greatest test batter of all time and 2nd greatest odi batter.

In tests I just believe sobers, Bradman, Steve smith are the only 3 > him.
 
Sachin had a world class batting unit to support him. Smith doesn't.

Anyway I dont hate Sachin, I view him as the 4th greatest test batter of all time and 2nd greatest odi batter.

In tests I just believe sobers, Bradman, Steve smith are the only 3 > him.
You can have greatest batting unit supporting you but you cannot win matches without a great bowling unit. Smith might have poor batters around him but has an ATG bowling unit. His runs will still be converted to wins due the bowling attack Australia has. If Smith was batting for India in the 90's he would have been like Sachin. Would have scored a lot of runs but would not been too many in wins. Why isn't the same criticism there on Lara who only has 8 of his 34 hundreds in wins? Why is it always about Sachin? Despite how poor WI were, they still had Ambrose, Walsh, Bishop bowling for them till 2000 and had Chanderpaul, Carl Hooper, Jimmy Adams along with him. Still his performances are far worse than Sachin. No his 153 no and 277 and his useless 375 & 400 does not get him off the hook.

If Sachin was playing for SA or Australia or Pakistan in the 90's he would have ended up with far more hundreds in wins. The problem with lots of cricket fans is that there is a bleed over between formats. People don't understand that a single batter scoring runs cannot win you Test matches. If that was the case Andy Flower could have won games for Zimbabwe, he averaged 51.5. Kumar Sangakkara has 19 hundreds in wins, 15 of them came at home, why is that? Why couldn't he win games in Australia when he averaged 60? There is a big correlation between batters who have most hundreds or runs in wins and the bowling attack their teams possessed. It is ridiculous to say that Smith is better than Sachin because his runs contribute to wins more. You can say in your opinion Smith is a better batter, I have no qualms about that but that cannot be related to win % of the team. For example if Smith was playing for Pakistan and was averaging 56 right now, do you think he will be winning same amount of games? The answer is no, everyone knows it.
 
Root is still slightly less then 3k runs away. But then again he's only 34 and England plays test matches more then any other team.

Let's see, although if he wants to chase that down, he should target atleast scoring 400 to 500 runs vs India.
 
You can have greatest batting unit supporting you but you cannot win matches without a great bowling unit. Smith might have poor batters around him but has an ATG bowling unit. His runs will still be converted to wins due the bowling attack Australia has. If Smith was batting for India in the 90's he would have been like Sachin. Would have scored a lot of runs but would not been too many in wins. Why isn't the same criticism there on Lara who only has 8 of his 34 hundreds in wins? Why is it always about Sachin? Despite how poor WI were, they still had Ambrose, Walsh, Bishop bowling for them till 2000 and had Chanderpaul, Carl Hooper, Jimmy Adams along with him. Still his performances are far worse than Sachin. No his 153 no and 277 and his useless 375 & 400 does not get him off the hook.

If Sachin was playing for SA or Australia or Pakistan in the 90's he would have ended up with far more hundreds in wins. The problem with lots of cricket fans is that there is a bleed over between formats. People don't understand that a single batter scoring runs cannot win you Test matches. If that was the case Andy Flower could have won games for Zimbabwe, he averaged 51.5. Kumar Sangakkara has 19 hundreds in wins, 15 of them came at home, why is that? Why couldn't he win games in Australia when he averaged 60? There is a big correlation between batters who have most hundreds or runs in wins and the bowling attack their teams possessed. It is ridiculous to say that Smith is better than Sachin because his runs contribute to wins more. You can say in your opinion Smith is a better batter, I have no qualms about that but that cannot be related to win % of the team. For example if Smith was playing for Pakistan and was averaging 56 right now, do you think he will be winning same amount of games? The answer is no, everyone knows it.
That wasn't my only case. It was just one point that you obsessed over.

Smith has the best conversion rate since Bradman, his rate of scoring from 50-100 is far higher then Sachin, infact Australia ruined him by promoting smith to open which they should not have done.

To top it off not only does he convert more hundreds, he averages higher in a bowling friendly era of test cricket granted Sachin faced superior bowlers even if some pitches were flat.

However smith likely won't surpass Sachin in runs and centuries due to age and lack of games in the same way bumrah despite being a better test bowler then Anderson will never surpass him in no of wickets.
 
That wasn't my only case. It was just one point that you obsessed over.

Smith has the best conversion rate since Bradman, his rate of scoring from 50-100 is far higher then Sachin, infact Australia ruined him by promoting smith to open which they should not have done.

To top it off not only does he convert more hundreds, he averages higher in a bowling friendly era of test cricket granted Sachin faced superior bowlers even if some pitches were flat.

However smith likely won't surpass Sachin in runs and centuries due to age and lack of games in the same way bumrah despite being a better test bowler then Anderson will never surpass him in no of wickets.
Come on, more than half of sachins career was on diabolical pitches. In truly flat era Sachin suffered from two career threatening injuries and couldn't capitalise much.

Also barely a couple of months ago, this was their comparison

1747972920051.png



I don't see any "more conversions" or higher average. They are identical at this point.

Let's wait till smith retires, hand eye coordination batsmen like him usually
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Come on, more than half of sachins career was on diabolical pitches. In truly flat era Sachin suffered from two career threatening injuries and couldn't capitalise much.

Also barely a couple of months ago, this was their comparison

1747973050473.png



I don't see any "more conversions" or higher average. They are identical at this point.

Let's wait till smith retires, hand eye coordination batsmen like him usually
They are not identical, Smith has more centuries, more 50's and a higher avg but yes the difference isnt that high.

Secondly you're forgetting that smith declined due to aus making him open. Hes back in form in BGT.

Lastly I never said smith is a million times > Sachin. Just that he's better in test cricket which no one can deny.

Also no Sachin did not play on diabolical pitches 🤣🤣. That was only in odi when he made his debut in the red ball era.
 
Sachin was a great batter and Root is not a guy who cannot be appreciated or compared here.. Root might not break the record but he is ENgland's greatest test player and one of the best in the world just like sachin.
 
Sachin was a great batter and Root is not a guy who cannot be appreciated or compared here.. Root might not break the record but he is ENgland's greatest test player and one of the best in the world just like sachin.
Jack hobbs, am I a joke to you?
 
They are not identical, Smith has more centuries, more 50's and a higher avg but yes the difference isnt that high.

Secondly you're forgetting that smith declined due to aus making him open. Hes back in form in BGT.

Lastly I never said smith is a million times > Sachin. Just that he's better in test cricket which no one can deny.

Also no Sachin did not play on diabolical pitches 🤣🤣. That was only in odi when he made his debut in the red ball era.
Huh, Sachin has 2 more 100s, 70 more runs and and just 0.4 less average, what are you talking about?

And look at the average test scores and other batsmen's avseagea till 1996, when he achieved those numbers, lol.

Those numbers are not from flat pitch era. That came later in his career
 
Root has achieved more overall... Jack hoobs could be great but Root is their number 1
Achieved more how? By playing more number of games? What kind of metric is that? That's Indian fan boy Sachin and England fan boy James Anderson level of argumentation?

Hobbs is the

1) Oldest player to score a 100 at age 46
2) 2nd fastest to 5000 test runs all time
3) over 61,000 fc runs and 199 centuries in fc cricket
4) One of the highest test batting averages of all time.

Its just that he was badly overshadowed by Bradman during his era but he's a solid test batsmen of that time. Top 5 atleast.

Root is top 2 only behind smith but he plays in crickets weakest test batting era of all time.

In the 2000's the best test batters were (Not ranked in order)

1) Ponting
2) Sachin
3) Dravid
4) Lara
5) Kallis
6) Hayden
7) Gilly
8) Sehwag
9) Laxman( I dont rate him but he has played wonders so fair)
10) Damien Martyn
11) Sangakkara

List goes on and on, their many others who i haven't named but the point is the list is bloody endless

Who's a goat in this era besides Steve smith?

Root and Kohli are virtual no bodies when it comes to comparing them with 2000 batters. Its just England test team post Bradman has been so bad that Root makes everyone look good in comparison.

The fact that Brooks, Jaiswal, Travis, Kane Williamson, Bavuma etc etc are considered solid test batters in this era shows how far the standards have fallen.

Root is good but he has a horrible conversion rate, a medicore record in pacy and bouncy conditons and often times does need a bit of hand holding to get going.
 
Huh, Sachin has 2 more 100s, 70 more runs and and just 0.4 less average, what are you talking about?

And look at the average test scores and other batsmen's avseagea till 1996, when he achieved those numbers, lol.

Those numbers are not from flat pitch era. That came later in his career
You sent me the wrong reddit link fam. I think you were supposed to be send me the one when they were both at 116 test games and not at 88
 
Achieved more how? By playing more number of games? What kind of metric is that? That's Indian fan boy Sachin and England fan boy James Anderson level of argumentation?

Hobbs is the

1) Oldest player to score a 100 at age 46
2) 2nd fastest to 5000 test runs all time
3) over 61,000 fc runs and 199 centuries in fc cricket
4) One of the highest test batting averages of all time.

Its just that he was badly overshadowed by Bradman during his era but he's a solid test batsmen of that time. Top 5 atleast.

Root is top 2 only behind smith but he plays in crickets weakest test batting era of all time.

In the 2000's the best test batters were (Not ranked in order)

1) Ponting
2) Sachin
3) Dravid
4) Lara
5) Kallis
6) Hayden
7) Gilly
8) Sehwag
9) Laxman( I dont rate him but he has played wonders so fair)
10) Damien Martyn
11) Sangakkara

List goes on and on, their many others who i haven't named but the point is the list is bloody endless

Who's a goat in this era besides Steve smith?

Root and Kohli are virtual no bodies when it comes to comparing them with 2000 batters. Its just England test team post Bradman has been so bad that Root makes everyone look good in comparison.

The fact that Brooks, Jaiswal, Travis, Kane Williamson, Bavuma etc etc are considered solid test batters in this era shows how far the standards have fallen.

Root is good but he has a horrible conversion rate, a medicore record in pacy and bouncy conditons and often times does need a bit of hand holding to get going.
Era adjustments work both ways bro. If Hobbs gets credit for playing on bad pitches, Root gets credit for facing better bowlers, DRS, and tighter fielding.

Root is better than Dravid/Hayden/Kallis in many ways. Hobbs was a legend, but Root’s achievements in a tougher bowling era deserve respect.
 
Era adjustments work both ways bro. If Hobbs gets credit for playing on bad pitches, Root gets credit for facing better bowlers, DRS, and tighter fielding.

Root is better than Dravid/Hayden/Kallis in many ways. Hobbs was a legend, but Root’s achievements in a tougher bowling era deserve respect.
Im not mentioning era adjustments.

Hobbs was top 5 in an era where batters and bowlers were more or less equal to one another excluding Bradman who was an outlier.

Games between aus and England would have gone down to the wire if Bradman wasn't around.

Root is top 2 in an era where batters are rubbish. As for root, he's not better then dravid 100%.

Root needs to up his conversion rate and improve his stats in Australia to reach Ponting tier as a test batter.

Atm he's tier 2 which is still solid.
 
Im not mentioning era adjustments.

Hobbs was top 5 in an era where batters and bowlers were more or less equal to one another excluding Bradman who was an outlier.

Games between aus and England would have gone down to the wire if Bradman wasn't around.

Root is top 2 in an era where batters are rubbish. As for root, he's not better then dravid 100%.

Root needs to up his conversion rate and improve his stats in Australia to reach Ponting tier as a test batter.

Atm he's tier 2 which is still solid.
Conversion Rate:

Root: 29 centuries, 58 fifties (1:2 ratio).

Ponting: 41 centuries, 62 fifties (1:1.5 ratio).

Dravid: 36 centuries, 63 fifties (1:1.75 ratio).

Root’s conversion is not "horrible"—it’s comparable to legends.

Root in Australia: 1,100+ runs @ 40.74 (not great, but not terrible).

Ponting in India: Avg. 26.48 (worse than Root in Aus).

Lara in India: Avg. 33.80 (Root averages 50+ in India)
 
Conversion Rate:

Root: 29 centuries, 58 fifties (1:2 ratio).

Ponting: 41 centuries, 62 fifties (1:1.5 ratio).

Dravid: 36 centuries, 63 fifties (1:1.75 ratio).

Root’s conversion is not "horrible"—it’s comparable to legends.

Root in Australia: 1,100+ runs @ 40.74 (not great, but not terrible).

Ponting in India: Avg. 26.48 (worse than Root in Aus).

Lara in India: Avg. 33.80 (Root averages 50+ in India)
Root in Australia? How bad is he their? Ponting was bad in India no doubt because for some reason he couldn't play harbajan despite easily managing him in odi.

But root in aus is worse as England are literally the ones who shoved the indigenous aussies away and formed their own land.

Australians are really just British with thicker accents. To top it off England has been playing against aus on aussie pitches the most and more then any other team.

Its fine for an aussie or English batter to be trash in subcontinent conditons, but fir an England batter to be bad in aussie conditons?
 
Forget Joe Root, Jack Hobbs can lay a solid claim to be the second greatest Test batsman of all time alongside Sachin, Sobers and Viv. We are speaking of a man who made it as an opener in cricket Bible WISDEN's All Time XI.​
 
Forget Joe Root, Jack Hobbs can lay a solid claim to be the second greatest Test batsman of all time alongside Sachin, Sobers and Viv. We are speaking of a man who made it as an opener in cricket Bible WISDEN's All Time XI.​
I think Hobbs is the greatest test opener.

I wouldn't put him > Sobers though.
 
If BCCI played Zimbabwe, Bangldesh tours and flat pitch Pakistan tours during last few years of Sachin's test career he would have have had 18k runs with 55 test centuries.
 
Sachin played 9 test vs Zimbabwe, so i guess those runs dont count. Why cant we as a fan of cricket appreciate when Root might do....there is a chance he might not even break it. I sense fans are getting nervous.

He played a Zimbabwe team that was a solid competitor back in the day.
Zimbabwe beat Pakistan in test cricket btw.
 
Root beating Sachin's record only proves that Sachin being no 1 based of runs is a flawed metric in the same way Anderson being no 1 based of metric is flawed.

That is no of games dependant. By this logic dozens upon dozens of batters are > Bradman.

However yes Root isnt > Sachin otherwise. Steve smith vs Sachin is a closer debate tbf.
 
Root lost form a bit. I hope he will break Tendulkar's record. :inti

He is less than 3000 runs away now.
 
I feel like root will break it.

He needs to improve his avg vs Australia to be considered > Sachin though.
 
Root we are all rooting for you, Make Sachin Proud Again
====
View attachment 155731
He doesn't need to. Ik for sure that root will have a successful ashes + a succesful tour with india.

He also scored a half century and raised that avg up. In his last 10 games hes been avg 70 which is phenomenal.

Unlike Sachin who's stats kept and kept declining as he aged, Sachin is lucky he didnt play more as that avg would have decreased further from 53,

Root has consistently been improving day by day.

Root reaching 53 avg, 16K runs and getting avg in AUS from 35 to 40 is an inevitability.

Minus that 35 avg, he has a higher avg in a majority of conditons that sachin has been in, he's already scored more then 500 runs in a series which Tenda never did.

His home avg is > Sachin, only his away avg is below.

Atm root isnt their yet but 100% he will reach their. However you will then see Indians come up with new metrics that didnt exist.

Its funny because even Prime Kohli never achieved this metric. Current root is avg 55 in actuality and is performing way way better in all conditons (excluding Aus) then kohli ever did even in Prime.

Yet their PP posts that claimed that Kohli was already > Sachin in test at the time. But the same metric doesnt apply to root who is genuinely > Prime kohli atm.
 
He will not only break it but extend the record to 17-18k test runs
 
He will not only break it but extend the record to 17-18k test runs
Root just needs to do these 4 things to surpass Sachin in test.

A) Get aus avg upto 40 as hes already >>>> Sachin is so many other away dens.

B) Get avg upto 52-53

C) Beat the run tally. If he gets 17K to 18K even if its at an avg of 52 then it doesnt matter. Samga and kallis are at 55 and 57 but their not viewed > for obvious.

D) Improve away avg, maybe get it upto 50.

Not a tough task imo.
 
1. Joe Root surpasses Sachin Tendulkar's total Test runs tally.

2. Pakistan wins the next ODI WC, T20 WC, WTC.

I'm pretty sure if Pakistani fans were given an option to choose one of the two above, they'll choose the latter.​
 
1. Joe Root surpasses Sachin Tendulkar's total Test runs tally.

2. Pakistan wins the next ODI WC, T20 WC, WTC.

I'm pretty sure if Pakistani fans were given an option to choose one of the two above, they'll choose the latter.​
Not me, I choose option 1.

For starters its more realistic. Secondly for me cricket is more about the journey of following your favourite players rather then the team.

Excluding classic aus and windies, which team had been supported across eras in the same light as players?

In cricket discussions we always talk about border, Sachin, Lara, etc etc and revear them as players and follow their journey.

In Pakistan their isnt anyone interesting atm. Which cricketer is worth following? Who had the future ATG flair attached to them?

Fakhar Zaman was the only players who excited me probably due to reminding me of saeed anwar(granted no where near as classy or elegant in batting)

The current crop isnt worth discussing.

Root on the other hand has the golden opportunity to surpass the goat. That's more of a discussions and memorable moment then what Pakistan does atm.
 
One man can shatter the hopes and dreams and fantasies of over 1 billion fanatics.

That man is Joe Root. He must be protected at all costs.
Are you talking about the protection like BCCI is doing with Bumrah or protection from Indian fans itself.???

LOL
 
I feel like root will break it.

He needs to improve his avg vs Australia to be considered > Sachin though.

One thing I respect about Big Joe is the fact that he’s embraced Bazball as a leader and hasn’t accumulated all these runs by playing a boring brand. He might have a boring under the radar kind of personality but as a batter he’s been aggressive in test cricket. He’s become an absolute run machine.

Root just needs to do these 4 things to surpass Sachin in test.

A) Get aus avg upto 40 as hes already >>>> Sachin is so many other away dens.

B) Get avg upto 52-53

C) Beat the run tally. If he gets 17K to 18K even if its at an avg of 52 then it doesnt matter. Samga and kallis are at 55 and 57 but their not viewed > for obvious.

D) Improve away avg, maybe get it upto 50.

Not a tough task imo.


Yes at 17-18k test runs, a test average barely touching even 50 is incredible and that career will be seen greater than someone averaging 55 with 10k runs.

It’s not about purely numbers however I think people tend to remember the style. Muralitharan with even 800 wickets isn’t remembered as much as Wasim, Warne.
 
Well at least Sachin will remain the first ever to score most runs in Test Cricket.
What??
First cricketer to score that many runs but not first cricketer to score most runs. Before sachin someone else had scored most runs. And if root breaks his record he ll be the one with most runs.
 
Back
Top